Opinions wanted, looking for my first whitetail deer gun, 25-06 or 243, 270 Win

chuck nelson said:
Well, the OP asked about the 270. There is no magic to any cartridge. So the 270 would be a great choice. It is a great choice. As for long range, the longest shot I have ever seen on a big bull Elk was with a 270. The 130 gr TSX took the top of the poor bull's heart off at 560 yards and I think he took one wobbly step before falling flat on his face. Over and done just like that. There was a cow hunting idiot above the clearing that watched this whole thing unfold. He came down to chat while we addressed taking care of the bull. He was a magnum shooter and was sure that kill had to have been accomplished with a belted laser beam. When I told him it was the humble 270 he got down right annoyed and defensive. He had seen it with his own eyes and was offended by it. He reminds me a lot of many of the posters here. Although he did have the damning evidence laid out before him.
Click to expand...

Once the emotional rhetoric has been put aside, a .277 bullet is just a 7mm by another name, and one should expect a similar trajectory, accuracy, and terminal performance as with any 7mm cartridge of similar case capacity, firing a similar bullet at a similar velocity. Hosea Sarber packed a .270 while guiding for brown bear, Crazy Davey's dad packed a .270 while guiding in grizzly country, and our own WhyNot speaks highly of it, but the experiences of exceptional people should not form the basis of a novice's expectation. The fellow who was offended by the .270's longish shot didn't know much about external ballistics, but that doesn't mean a .300 magnum wouldn't have been a better choice, for some people, under those same circumstances, the dead elk notwithstanding.
 
But the discussion is about the 270 and the offended party, by his own admission, has never used it on game. I also know of two Model 70 270 Winchester's that combined have killed a couple dozen grizzly bears and never failed at it.
 
Well CN..........If I understand you correctly you're saying that the dozens of animals I have taken with the X bullet, TSX and TTSX don't qualify as experience because they were not taken with a 270 Winchester. I would hazard a wager that I have taken more game with Barnes bullets by far than you have and I have found them to be unreliable in performance. Some are outstanding and some were not, unlike Accubonds and Partitions which I can rely on every time to open and penetrate and impart shock. Dogleg, who again has shot dozens and maybe more animals, came to the same conclusions as I have.........sometimes they work flawlessly and sometimes they don't, which usually leads to a long day tracking, if a quick follow up isn't possible. He has tried more bullets than I have and has settled on Swift A-frames as his most reliable performer, which my experience tends to support but I have found them to be unreliable in my ability to obtain them whereas Accubonds and Parts would seem to be more available. I did use 200 gn A-frames as back up to 150 gn TTSXs I my 300 Wby in RSA one hunt and after two fairly long range bullet failures, I switched over and finished up the hunt with the A-frames. How do I know they were bullet failures? Because in Africa we had trackers who are outstanding at their job and few animals are ever lost. One, a white blesbok that took one through the neck, due to gusting winds and a 375-400 mtr shot, didn't even go down.........we did get him shortly thereafter with a nice running shot at about 250 mtrs, but the neck shot did not seem to be impairing him one bit. I know that you will say that it was a piss poor hit and the bullet wasn't to blame, but all I know is the bullet did almost no damage and passed right through, this to me is total bullet failure. When all hits are perfect, you can use pretty much any bullet and it will kill effectively, especially beyond 300 mtrs. Hell Bergers and Sierras will kill effectively beyond 300 mtrs with a perfect hit, as will FMJs..........it is when the hit is less than perfect that bullet performance is paramount. I know, I'm in the less than 1% on this forum that occasionally makes a less than perfect hit........and admits it, hell I even miss from time to time. But I digress........I can pretty much guarantee that had that been an Accubond or Partition the blesbok, may not have been dead, but he sure as hell wouldn't have been running flat out 10 minutes later, and I would bet a good rifle that either would have taken him off his feet on the hit. Such has been my experience anyway............
 
Choose your first rifle wisely.

If you make the right choice, you can hunt deer,moose,caribou,black bear ,etc with the same rifle and you will never need a replacement.

One rifle. One zero. No headaches. You can just grab your gear and focus on HUNTING.


 
I was just in the sporting good section of the local big box store. They had:

7 flavours of 30-06
5 of 308
4 of 303
4 of 270
2 of 300 Win Mag
2 of 7mm RM
2 of 30-30
2 of 243
2 of 223

That was it for centerfire rifle. This selection is typical, if you pick the 25-06 you will have more trouble finding shells which may or may not be a big deal.
 
c-fbmi said:
Well CN..........If I understand you correctly you're saying that the dozens of animals I have taken with the X bullet, TSX and TTSX don't qualify as experience because they were not taken with a 270 Winchester. I would hazard a wager that I have taken more game with Barnes bullets by far than you have and I have found them to be unreliable in performance. Some are outstanding and some were not, unlike Accubonds and Partitions which I can rely on every time to open and penetrate and impart shock. Dogleg, who again has shot dozens and maybe more animals, came to the same conclusions as I have.........sometimes they work flawlessly and sometimes they don't, which usually leads to a long day tracking, if a quick follow up isn't possible. He has tried more bullets than I have and has settled on Swift A-frames as his most reliable performer, which my experience tends to support but I have found them to be unreliable in my ability to obtain them whereas Accubonds and Parts would seem to be more available. I did use 200 gn A-frames as back up to 150 gn TTSXs I my 300 Wby in RSA one hunt and after two fairly long range bullet failures, I switched over and finished up the hunt with the A-frames. How do I know they were bullet failures? Because in Africa we had trackers who are outstanding at their job and few animals are ever lost. One, a white blesbok that took one through the neck, due to gusting winds and a 375-400 mtr shot, didn't even go down.........we did get him shortly thereafter with a nice running shot at about 250 mtrs, but the neck shot did not seem to be impairing him one bit. I know that you will say that it was a piss poor hit and the bullet wasn't to blame, but all I know is the bullet did almost no damage and passed right through, this to me is total bullet failure. When all hits are perfect, you can use pretty much any bullet and it will kill effectively, especially beyond 300 mtrs. Hell Bergers and Sierras will kill effectively beyond 300 mtrs with a perfect hit, as will FMJs..........it is when the hit is less than perfect that bullet performance is paramount. I know, I'm in the less than 1% on this forum that occasionally makes a less than perfect hit........and admits it, hell I even miss from time to time. But I digress........I can pretty much guarantee that had that been an Accubond or Partition the blesbok, may not have been dead, but he sure as hell wouldn't have been running flat out 10 minutes later, and I would bet a good rifle that either would have taken him off his feet on the hit. Such has been my experience anyway............
Click to expand...


And we go round and round and round. I have killed game with the X, TSX, XLC, TTSX, LRX, Accubond, solid base, BT, Partition, Speer HC, Speer BT, Hdy Interlock, Interbond, GMX, Swift A-Frame, North Fork, Sierra game king, and some I have likely forgotten. I also collect from necropsy as many bullets as I can recover. I still don't know what I prefer. But if you are a fringe lung shooter, the Mono Metal might be a poor choice.
 
chuck nelson said:
And we go round and round and round. I have killed game with the X, TSX, XLC, TTSX, LRX, Accubond, solid base, BT, Partition, Speer HC, Speer BT, Hdy Interlock, Interbond, GMX, Swift A-Frame, North Fork, Sierra game king, and some I have likely forgotten. I also collect from necropsy as many bullets as I can recover. I still don't know what I prefer. But if you are a fringe lung shooter, the Mono Metal might be a poor choice.
Click to expand...

So with all said game harvested with all of said bullets, and all of the forgotten stuff, how does one go about making a Reccomendation?.....

Before I reloaded, I took somewhere in the vicinity of 50 big game animals as well as as several coyotes and wolves....... I appreciate your singular experiences, but fail to see how your experiences vary from the average Hunter.......
 
I've never been a 270 fan. I did however inherit one from my father inlaw when he past on....a mid 70's remington ADL.

I decided you use it one year for most of my hunts (kinda like taking his memory hunting with me)....In that one year with his 270 I took a moose, elk, whitetail and 2 black bears, plus a few coyotes and one wolf. Now, after using it that one season I really have a hard time finding any fault with the 270 and that rifle. Plain and simple, it works, and it works great! :)

PS....all game was shot with cup and core 150 grain bullets.
 
Superbrad said:
So with all said game harvested with all of said bullets, and all of the forgotten stuff, how does one go about making a Reccomendation?.....

Before I reloaded, I took somewhere in the vicinity of 50 big game animals as well as as several coyotes and wolves....... I appreciate your singular experiences, but fail to see how your experiences vary from the average Hunter.......
Click to expand...


I fail to see your point. The always or never crowd are flat out lying this you can be sure of. I don't currently have a 270 in the safe but I do know when someone won't recommend it as a decent deer round on principle that they are either healthy on pride, short on experience, or just want to look cool on the Internet.
 
Last edited:
bearkilr said:
Looks like I'd be considered a short range brush hunter in 2016. I like to keep my shots at 400 or less. :)
Click to expand...

The definition of long range has certainly changed since the advent of long range game shooting, super accurate hunting weight rifles, and VLD bullets that have the accuracy and terminal performance to humanely take game with impact velocities well below 2000 fps have come about. I never considered myself a long range game shooter, but like you, I'm definitely in the short range camp today.
 
chuck nelson said:
I fail to see your point. The always or never crowd are flat out lying this you can be sure of. I don't currently have a 270 in the safe but I do know when someone won't recommend it as a decent deer round on principle that they are either healthy on pride, short on experience, or just want to look cool on the Internet.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, that is my point.... Far too many here use something, like it due to a good experience or two and suddenly hail it as the best.... For example, I have used all 3 of the cartridges mentioned in the OP and had great experience with all of them.... But, if I had not used them all and used only .270 I may be inclined to come into this thread and tout it as "the best"....

There are some here that tout the TTSX as the second coming of Christ, but it doesn't change the fact that the animals I shot with Rem Core Lokts are still as dead today as they were the day I shot them.... Would the TTSX have made them deader?... Likely not....

The same applies to the .270... The 270 crowd has a tendency to declare it "the best", but many of them have little exposure to other cartridges.... So, while you can say that it is wrong to dislike the .270 if you have no experience with it, the same applies in reverse.... It is wrong to tout the .270 as "the best" when you dont have any experience with other chamberings....
 
I agree SB, with what you say above and just to clarify a couple things.......I have never said the 270 was not an adequate deer cartridge, what I said is that I don't like it. I have chosen this particular cartridge to hate and that is my prerogative. I think the 270 is certainly an adequate deer, caribou, sheep and goat cartridge, and have never said otherwise. I also happen to think it is one of the better ladies cartridges out there for light to medium game, as it is very easy to shoot by much lighter framed people. I believe it's ballistics puts it smack dab in the same bucket with a dozen other cartridges that I happen to like and think quite highly of, so no I have never said it isn't adequate........again, what I have said 100s of times........I DON'T LIKE IT !!!!! Not for any particular ballistic reason that I'm aware of, maybe just because so many people tout it as "The Best" or "The end all be all" or "If you got a 270 you don't need any other rifle" and endless other BS that has inundated my ears over the years. It's possibly the same syndrome as Gatehouse and the 375 Imposter, he has created a whole hate group all on his own and it has nothing to do with the ballistics of the Ruger cartridge.
I'm still curious for anyone to tell me what the 270 does better than many other cartridges in it's ballistic class.............Why would someone recommend a 270 over a 30-06 or 280 or 7X57, 7mm RM or any of the 6.5s...........other than ammo availability, which I will concede right from the get go, but carries zero weight for the reloader. I might also add that pretty much anywhere you can buy 270 ammo you can also buy 30-06, 7 mag and 300 WM.
 
Many on here will know that Jack O'Connor was a strong advocate of the 270 Winchester!
In 1975, while still the shooting and hunting editor of Outdoor Life Magazine, he wrote a lengthy article on the advent of the 50th anniversary of the 270. He states that he had one of the very first Winchester 270 rifles in 1925 and of course had owned them ever since and had a tremendous amount of experience with them in those fifty years.
The gist of his article, really, was that when Winchester brought out the 270 in 1925, they also developed what he terms as a spectacular bullet, in 130 grains. The way he describes it the bullet sounds like it may have been very similar to the modern bullets with all the T's and X's in their name, that has so many on were going all goggley eyes over.
Jack writes, in 1975, that he has never seen a better game bullet than the 130 grain projectile that Winchester developed for their 270 in 1925. He states it was what gave the 270 such great performance, was the bullet he had used in many stories he wrote about, in telling of the great performance of the 270.
He further states that the bullet was too expensive to manufacture and shortly into the great depression of the 1930s it was dropped from production.
 
Between the three options of calibers listed by the OP, 270 is my pick. Like has been said in other posts, It can be used on everything from antelope up to elk.

I wouldn't recommend a 270 over calibers in the same ballistic class (such as any 7mm cartridges, 6.5mm's, etc), choosing your caliber when they're that close is entirely one's prerogative.

However, the OP asked to choose between 3 calibers, not an amalgamation of many calibers in the same ballistic class.

I fail to see where the arguments are arising from.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom